In a small rural community in the Philippines, an artist recently secured a three-year grant to promote arts education, thanks to a well-structured proposal drafted with the help of ChatGPT. “For someone like me who isn’t very good at structuring my thoughts, ChatGPT is heaven-sent,” he enthused. Yet, just days earlier in the same city, an educator lamented the state of student essays, riddled with generic phrases churned out by artificial intelligence (AI) tools. These contrasting experiences encapsulate a growing debate across South East Asia: is generative AI a boon for productivity or a barrier to critical thinking and creativity?
As AI tools like ChatGPT become ubiquitous, their impact on education and personal development is under intense scrutiny. For many in the region, where access to quality education can be uneven, AI offers a lifeline—helping individuals articulate ideas they might otherwise struggle to express. However, educators warn that over-reliance on such technology risks stunting the very skills students need most: analysis, synthesis, and original thought. This tension raises critical questions about how AI should be integrated into learning environments without undermining the essence of education itself.
A Productivity Boost with Hidden Costs
Generative AI excels at tasks that require templated or regurgitated content, making it a powerful tool in workplace settings across South East Asia. In offices from Manila to Bangkok, staff members use AI to draft emails, letters, and reports, saving time for other priorities. Even when the output is mediocre, as many users acknowledge, the effort to revise it is often less than starting from scratch. For individuals less confident with language or structure—whether due to educational gaps or linguistic barriers in multilingual societies—AI can level the playing field, enabling clearer communication. 
Yet, this efficiency comes at a potential cost. Educators argue that writing is not just about the end product but the process itself—grappling with ideas, finding one’s voice, and learning to frame arguments. When AI does the “heavy lifting,” as one Manila-based teacher put it, users bypass these formative struggles. For students, whose primary goal should be mastery rather than productivity, this shortcut can be particularly detrimental. Constantly outsourcing writing tasks to AI may limit their growth in critical thinking, potentially capping their proficiency and creativity at a low ceiling.
This concern resonates across the region, where education systems often prioritise rote learning over analytical skills. In countries like Vietnam and Thailand, where curriculum reforms are gradually shifting towards critical thinking, the unchecked use of AI could undermine these efforts. If students lean on tools like ChatGPT to complete assignments, they miss opportunities to develop the intellectual resilience needed for higher education and beyond.
The Classroom Conundrum: Ban or Adapt?
The rise of AI in education has forced teachers to confront a stark reality: traditional homework and assessment methods are becoming less reliable. In the Philippines, some educators have expressed frustration over the inability to prevent students from using AI outside school hours. Even when schools block such tools on their networks, students can access them at home or on personal devices. Detection software like GPTZero or Grammarly’s AI checker exists, but results are inconsistent, and tech-savvy students can use “humanizing” tools to evade scrutiny.
Some teachers have gone as far as questioning the relevance of homework altogether, arguing that ready-made answers render traditional tasks obsolete. However, dismissing homework as irrelevant is, as one educator in Manila described, a “histrionic and lazy” response. Instead, the challenge lies in adapting to this new landscape. Teachers across South East Asia are beginning to rethink lesson plans, exploring ways to integrate AI strategically while fostering essential skills.
One innovative approach, gaining traction in urban schools in Manila and Ho Chi Minh City, treats AI tools like calculators—permitted for specific tasks but not as a crutch. For instance, students might use ChatGPT to research a topic, verify sources, and then write their essays by hand in class. Teachers provide feedback on these drafts and allocate time for revisions, ensuring the focus remains on personal effort and improvement. Such methods aim to balance technological assistance with the development of original thought.
Teaching Discernment in a Digital Age
Beyond adaptation, educators see AI as an opportunity to teach critical examination of technology itself. By highlighting the limitations of generative AI—such as its tendency to produce generic or inaccurate content—teachers can encourage students to question rather than blindly accept digital outputs. In a classroom in Cebu, for example, a teacher tasked students with comparing AI-generated summaries of historical events with verified sources, revealing discrepancies that sparked lively debate. These exercises not only expose the shortcomings of AI but also underscore the importance of human judgement.
This approach fosters a sense of responsibility among students to use AI thoughtfully. Rather than viewing it as a shortcut, they learn to practice discernment and discipline—skills that are vital in an era of information overload. For many educators in the region, the goal is to enhance technological literacy without compromising critical and creative thinking. This lesson extends beyond the classroom, offering a reflection for adults who increasingly rely on AI in professional and personal contexts.
A Regional Perspective: Balancing Innovation and Tradition
The debate over AI in education is not unique to the Philippines; it echoes across South East Asia, where rapid digitalisation intersects with diverse cultural and educational landscapes. In Singapore, known for its tech-forward policies, schools are piloting AI tools to personalise learning, yet strict guidelines ensure students still engage in independent problem-solving. Conversely, in rural areas of Laos or Cambodia, where internet access remains limited, the AI dilemma is less immediate but looms as connectivity improves.
Cultural values also shape responses to AI. In collectivist societies like Vietnam, where education is often seen as a communal responsibility, there is a strong push to preserve human interaction in learning. Teachers and parents worry that over-reliance on AI could erode the mentorship and dialogue central to traditional education. Meanwhile, in tech hubs like Kuala Lumpur, there is greater openness to AI as a tool for innovation, though concerns about equity persist—will AI widen the gap between urban and rural students with differing access to technology?
Thoughtful Integration
As AI continues to reshape education, the stakes for South East Asia are high. The region’s young population, often hailed as a demographic dividend, must be equipped with the skills to navigate a future where technology and human ingenuity coexist. While generative AI offers undeniable benefits—streamlining tasks and empowering those with limited language skills—it cannot replace the intellectual growth that comes from wrestling with ideas firsthand.
The path forward lies in thoughtful integration, where AI serves as a tool to enhance, not dictate, learning. Educators must lead the charge, redesigning curricula to prioritise critical thinking over rote outputs and teaching students to wield technology with discernment. Policymakers, too, have a role, ensuring equitable access to digital tools while setting guidelines to prevent misuse.
For now, the artist in Manila celebrates his grant, and the educator persists in guiding students towards originality. Their stories are a microcosm of a broader regional struggle to balance efficiency with depth, innovation with tradition. If harnessed wisely, AI could be a catalyst for educational transformation in South East Asia—but only if it is met with the same creativity and critical thought it sometimes threatens to displace.
